.​​

One SHAMAN in the tribe of mankind,shares her insights on the motions of OUR NOTIONS:

​'voting'​............... which powerdo YOU chooseto be​in charge?

​​Esther Dageraad, modern shaman-in-jeansin the tribe of mankind, points towardsenergetically sound options for OUR development as man...kind

Many people are looking at the American elections, wondering with great concern, silently or out loud:​" What is going to happen, when Hillary Clinton is elected? "" What is going to happen when Donald Trump will be elected?""Which alternative options are there?"

Introduction on shamanic work:​Like all shamans,I am a spiritual advisor to leaders of communitiesin matters that concern the wellbeing of the whole tribe.I see patterns of collective emotional turbulence as an invitation to 'feel' deeply into the matter at hand,to connect with the deep invisible layers, the patterns of energy-in-motion,which form the base on any design of the dynamics in a living system.​I can tune into the vibrational characteristics and ...... listen, to what is known there.

Knowing the overall patterns of the desires of the tribe members,I see where the energetical setup does and doesn't match 'evolving into the desired direction'.

From there, I propose ' directions to look into'.I see which changes would have most effect, at the least costs,to alter the dynamics of the energy-in-motion... in such a way that the system moves naturally,​with ease and grace, into the desired direction.

I went deeply into the energetic design of our decision making processes, on a number of layers, from:

intra-personal to

inter-personal, all the way up through

inter-nationalinto the more abstract realms of

inter-est (the relations between 'what is')completing the cycle with

inter-n-al(l)) (the relations between all that 'is' and all that 'is not' within the One)

.... and could distil out of all the vibes I was sensing this one question, pointing towards a discongruent vibe:

"Is it (still) considered to be an expression of MAN being KIND that ‘a large contingent’ of our tribe is sidelined in our governing systems by a small minority making choices that are of high impact and great importance on the quality of live as a whole?"

I did immediately see that such behaviour is the actual reverse of the core ideas of the democratic governing systems, we designed rooted in the choice that the ideas supported by the majority of a group, are supposed to be chosen to be executed.

I acknowledged right away that the confusion on who is the minority and who is the majority lies in a difference in defining who we perceive to be 'in' the tribe we speak of and who isn't. Let me illustrates this on three levels we can all relatively easily relate to:

intra-personal:We put our conscious mind functions in charge of our choices,Which is indeed the majority of what we are most easily consciously aware of, however,seen from our total mind capacity, it forms only approcimately 20% of all functions being minded..... only, at least 80% of the live-processes within us take place subconsciously, below the thresholds of our awareness.

inter-personal:We put the flow of 'matter' in charge of our time-investment decisions.We see material values (stuff and money) as most influencial on our levels of prosperity and wellbeing,thinking:" what really matters is what you can count".However, the things you can count and weigh (matter) make up only a fraction of the whole flow in this Universe. The majority of 'things' that really, really matter to higher levels of richness is the invisible flow of 'what you can really count on' in life: the immaterial flow of the treasures of a good friendship: trust, faith, belief, support, comfort, sharing knowlegde, cooperation.......

inter-nationalRoughly 250 million voters on a population of roughly 320 million, sounds like a majority.Roughly 250 million voters on a population of roughly 7 billion, is very much a minority.

inter-estDoes 7 billion of very influencal people alive today sound like a whole lot of beings alive?We are only a tiny minority, in numbers, of all beings alive on this Earth,​who's lives we impact a great deal with our day to day decisions.

So, I wondered.....how could it be possible to design governing systems that do more justice to being one, applying the understandings of one sage, one sorcerer and one 'I'.

I vibrate with them on the same frequency: the tribe I live in on this planet is mankind.Where ' notion' has much more influence on proceedings than any 'nation'.

I wonder if we could be at the dawn now of a new direction developments, where we increasingly honour the notion of the interrelatedness of things, both seen and unseen.

Or..... do we choose to wait with designing new ways a while longer to the point where the old ones have really gone way beyond their expiry dates… as we did with some previous revolutionary changes we made to the governing systems.Bloodshed over notions we find nowadays to be perfectly normal?

Which revolutions in governing ourselves am I talking about here?

Revolutions in history shaping modern day democratic elections.

Through our social history, a wide range of examples have been developed with certain traits in common.

The first trait: assigning 'voting rights' to someimplies….. limiting the response ability of others

The process of deciding who is in power in the community revolves around ‘who has the right to vote?’

Those 'voting rights' (both to vote as well as to be able to be elected) were assigned to certain limited categories of people within the group concerned. Over time, we've seen these voting rights develop, expanding from:

a ‘ happy few'..... white noble and/or clergy men to a wider circle of white males occupying high positions in society.

from a circle of high society white men, to all white men over a certain age

from all white men over a certain age, to all whitemen and women over a certain age

from all whitemen and women over a certain age, to men and women of all skin colours over a certain age

That is roughly the situation we have arrived at today, in the majority of modern day democratic governing systems.

Then there is another aspect that is a trait of most modern day democratic governing systems.

This second trait is called campaigning.When the need for a change of leadership occurs, an election gets organised.Also, when the need to make a major decision occurs, a referendum gets organised.A date gets ‘set’ and prior to that day, candidates present their views to the people with the voting rights.Every day life of the campaigners gets for a while fully dedicated to winning votes.

This takes the shape of a series of ‘battles’:

revolving around ‘pro's’ and ‘con's’ of resolutions to problems

usually debating the various issues separately, one at the time.

The ammunition used is called ' arguments' and ' catching one liners'. Since they ‘hit’ on ‘one issue at the time’, taken out of its natural context, it is very difficult to get an overall picture of the overall structure.

The person who gets to shoot most ammunition in the air (covers the most ground on the battle ground of the public media), usually has great advantage. Air-time can be bought, it is called advertisement space.

The person or people who win(s) the election has gained the decision making power of the people in that tribe.

By winning on that designated day this sequence of battles, the candidate(s) gain(s) the power of the people, also by the way, the people of the people who clearly stated to desire 'something else'. ' Bad luck', being part of a minority?That sums up how it goes now, it describes the current situation.

How do we view that?It is my understanding, based on observations on what people say and do, that:

This how we believeis best modern day democracy in practise.

This is how we believe governing, decision making, has to be done.

This is how we believethat everybody who is involved in the issues the ‘elders’ will make decisions about, do get a fair say in proceedings, having had one opportunity to express their personal choice, answering only this one single question... to whom do I give my power (away) to make major decisions in my community?

Although we do acknowledge there may be some problems with ' the political system' as it stands, we also believe that there is no better alternative to governing our societies.

Question:Now, is that belief really true and fully justified?​

WARNING:

I am going to ask you now to reflect on a couple of ' what if's'.

They are purposefully designed to challenge your core beliefs and, therefore, chances are that you will find them highly uncomfortable to look into!You like believing what you believe, especially if you believe that they reflect obvious truths, because…. everybody else you are regularly in the presence of is showing signs of believing this…..

"He, how is this 'challenging some of my deepest core beliefs' supposed to be ' kind' behaviour?"

Well, the kind of kindness I om providing here, stems from knowing this:I do know that from the frustration of getting your comfort zone challenged, creativity and even better solutions and new succesful truth spring. So, I am kindly inviting us all, to evolve in even better versions of ourselves.Brian Eno has proven that in the music industry applying oblique techniques on bands with a successful and unique sound, like Coldplay and U2. ( link to a short an clear explanation of this by Tim Harford)I am inviting the band called mankind, to release a (r)evolutionary new album ;-)​

What if.......What if I say, that if a tribe only lets the adults vote, the tribe is missing out on the input and influence of a large part of the people who objectively have the most interest in decisions being made with an eye on the long-term sustainability, for they are likely to live with the effects the longest: the children of the tribe?( Hold your objections about the voting and choosing abilities of that category of tribe members… just keep reading… would be my advice)

What if I say, that if a tribe with a large intertribal influence only lets the people vote they identify as members of the tribe, the tribe is missing out on the input and influence of a large part of people who objectively have an enormous interest in decisions being made with an eye on the quality of the intertribal relationships, now and in the future.( Hold your objections about the practicalities of asking people in other tribes about their opinions… just keep reading… would be my advice)

What if I say, that if a tribe organises an election in a polarised way, where pro > this, implies the choice con > that.Whether ' this or that' is one theme, one program, one party or one president candidate.... this polarising approach is energetically building in conflict from day one into the decision making process!It is creating deep existential conflicts in our human brains, because a human has and needs access to a wider palette of choice, in order to feel fully human.

Denying the possibilities that you can be simultaneously pro-this and pro-that, or partially pro-this and partially pro-that or even see a completely different way that is nor this nor that, is denying aspects of your human(e)ness)

( Hold your objections about the logistically complex nightmare it would create to sort out all the individual person’s opinions and taking all those into account on every single issue that arises… just keep reading… would be my advice)

Still reading? Excellent.

If and whenyou are ready after all thisto open up your mindto seeing practical alternativeson ways to maximise your choosing power, within a notion of BEING ONE,you may want to see the ideas in the governing program,free style.PROGRAM